Wikipedia Résumé

A precis of my work on the English Wikipedia, 2004-2017 (edit counts, articles by subject, and particularly notable articles)
personal, Wikipedia
2010-10-182016-07-13 finished certainty: log importance: 4


Over the more than decade I have worked on the , I have writ­ten a few things. Some might won­der what, ex­act­ly, but not want to dig through >95,1331 ed­its (on Eng­lish on­ly). But even I don’t re­mem­ber every­thing I have done!

Sources

I’ve done my best to pull to­gether a list of my ma­jor con­tri­bu­tions; I’ve based it on the re­sults from the toolserver, specifi­cally 2 of Soxred’s tools which re­turn lists of pages cre­ated and ar­ti­cles most edited for a user:

  1. Most edited ar­ti­cles:

  2. Ar­ti­cles cre­at­ed:

Those lists are un­re­li­able, how­ev­er. They are in­com­plete; ‘cre­ated’ may be mis­lead­ing, as I make many redi­rects which may be turned into an ac­tual ar­ti­cle by a later user (for ex­am­ple, I am cred­ited with cre­at­ing the valu­able com­puter sci­ence ar­ti­cle when all I did was redi­rect that name to the main ar­ti­cle on ). The tool tries to fil­ter out redi­rects, but may be wrong. The most-edited list­ings are also mis­lead­ing in the sense that a great many ed­its on a page may sim­ply be un­do­ing van­dal­ism; I do not list be­low be­cause my dozens of ed­its there are just re­verts and I do not feel re­verts are a par­tic­u­larly valu­able ser­vice. Ar­ti­cle writ­ing is. Some such ar­ti­cles are listed where I have watched them for many years and feel that my su­per­vi­sion has risen to the level of a ma­jor con­tri­bu­tion. Con­verse­ly, some­times I have writ­ten ar­ti­cles offline and then added them as sin­gle gi­ant ed­its with a few fol­lowup ed­its to fix for­mat­ting er­rors; such ar­ti­cles would not show up very highly on the most-edited list.

I am cer­tain that some of the fol­low­ing en­tries are er­ro­neous, and I have omit­ted some ar­ti­cles that should be in­clud­ed. But I have done what I can. I am es­pe­cially proud of the high­lighted ar­ti­cles such as the Medici bank, Brethren of Pu­rity ar­ti­cles, and the Fu­ji­wara no Teika ar­ti­cle.

Subject areas

Psychology

Technology

Functional programming

History

American history

Japanese history

Philosophy/religion

Islamic

Art

Japanese art

Philosophy/religion

Chinese

Literature

Chinese

Japanese

Anime/manga

Western

SF

Star Wars

  1. This is based on sum­ming to­tal + deleted ed­its through Kate’s ed­it­coun­ter; this ap­par­ently leads to an un­der­es­ti­mate, since the live ed­it­count (2012-05-12) in Spe­cial:Pref­er­ences for User:G­w­ern is 42,400 ed­its ver­sus 38,806 ac­cord­ing to Kate.↩︎

  2. My Teika ar­ti­cle bears a unique dis­tinc­tion: it is the only Wikipedia work on which I have profited (as op­posed to the 3 stalk­ers I earned at var­i­ous points), by sell­ing it to the New World En­cy­clo­pe­dia (a en­cy­clo­pe­di­a).↩︎